tv Washington Journal CSPAN January 1, 2013 7:00am-10:00am EST
at noon eastern and we'll get latest and where the country stands on tax hikes and spending cuts. we will talk to a washington reporter about the fiscal cliff and at 8:30 eastern, the washington >> 89-9. the bill as amended is passed. ♪ host: in a highly unusual boat, the senate overwhelmingly approved a short-term measure that will prevent tech bytes and the majority of americans will also delaying the across the board automatic spending cuts for two more months. the measure moves to the house for a vote later today. good morning. happy new year. it is january 1, 2013. even though the country fell off
the bat -- the fiscal cliff, all reports are that congress can retroactively prevent the tax hikes set to begin today. it has one more day to prevent automatic spending cuts that take in on wednesday. our coverage of this class continues this morning on "washington journal." if you want all along, go to c- span.org/fiscalcliff. we will begin with your take on this emerging deal. democrats -- republican -- independents -- remember to send us a twit -- a tweet at twitter.com. facebook.com/c-span. or at c-span.org. the senate voted around 2:00 a.m. eastern time. here are the senators that voted no. michael bennet, democrat of
colorado, along with senator tom carper, democrat of delaware, senators grassley, harkin, as well as these four republicans, senators lee, paul, rubio, and shelby. not a boating were senators jim demint, the republican of south carolina. he is retiring. senators kirk and lautenberg as well. here was the reaction from all four house republican leaders. it put this out in a joint statement. here is what they had to say -- the house will honor its commitment to consider the senate agreement if it is passed. decisions about whether the house will seek to a set -- to except or amend the measure will not be made and house members and the american people had been able to review the legislation. the house is expected to come in at noon today.
there are some reports that a boat could happen as early as this afternoon. the house minority lindsey -- pine ridge -- house minority leader nancy pelosi tweeted a statement last night about when this bill might come to the house. she had to say, when a final agreement is reached and passed by the senate, i will present it to the house democratic caucus. from "the new york times," -- here is a "-- a quote -- we are getting your take on this. the senate approves this deal. it moves to the house today. chad in texas, an independent
color. europe first. >> everybody was in world war two or out of world war two. everybody had to give up something during that war. here we have all these wars that nobody had to take care of anything. these congressmen, and to this thing and is going the wrong way. they do not feel like they can work with the other side. i really think they should have forgone christmas and new year's holiday and really worked on this link, like during the lbj era. he's still walking with a bottle of bourbon and hold a leaders of the house and senate there until they made a deal. host: you think there should of
been a grand bargain, not this short-term deal as the senate passed last night. they have to come back to this in two months when they need to deal with the automatic spending cuts. caller: they need to deal with what is going to happen in the future, not just a couple of months. the peanut need to treat medicare and social secreted did they do not need to treat medicare and social security -- they do not need to treat medicare and social security as short-term picture. host: it still has to go to the house. the need enough votes to approve it. here is "the new york times at" on what they are calling the mcconnell-biden plan --
christine from illinois, the republican line. caller: hello, i am disappointed republican. i'm thinking about switching to the democratic party. i just want to say that mcconnell is really disrespectful to his boss. any buss that have a job, having worked in a factory, will make problems for the boss and not agree and compromise. everybody would talk to them and end up getting fired. they do all the propaganda on the fox network. it is embarrassing. i just wanted to say that i did see one man -- i forgot his name, a congressman, james inhofe, he had the gall to go on a foxx and talk to bush people like they are still in charge and get their opinions. it is not a good place.
the shows they have until 5:00, they are yanks. i need to be a democrat. host: 10 road in north carolina, the democratic color. what do you make of the early morning vote? caller: yes, i am glad to something being done about the fiscal cliff. the american people need to understand that the republicans put us in this situation, because when bill clinton left office, he left with a surplus. the republicans spent all the money. we went into recession. then president obama came on scene, and he brought us out of the recession, and it takes money to get out of recession. now they are trying to blame him for all of the spending. mitch mcconnell, he is a disgrace to the senate floor. he said he one of the president to be a one-term president. the people voted obama back in.
host: the minority leader, mitch mcconnell, has been negotiating with the vice president joe biden to come to some sort of agreement. what you make of that? caller: i'm talking about what mitch mcconnell said in the beginning. he did not want to work with this president. the want it to see him fail. they're hurting the american people by not helping obama. obama is good for the country, but people that listen to rush limbaugh, sarah palin, and fox news, that is why this country is going down like this. host: let me get your thoughts on president obama as a negotiator. what do you think? caller: he has reached out and showed an olive branch dejon banner ever since he has been in. -- john boehner ever since he has been in. president obama has tried to work with these people to get things done, and they will not work with him. host: let's hear from ron in
appleton, wisconsin. caller: i woke up this morning, and i am an engineer, an african-american. i have been blessed with a good income. however, when i woke up this morning, though i feared my taxes going up considerably, i was a bit disappointed. the reason for that is that i'm looking long term. taxes, you have to pay for the debt that we have occurred. at this point, it does not matter how we got there. whether it is republicans and democrats or whatever -- it will take all of us to get out of it. it amazes me that everyone wants everyone else to sacrifice, but when it comes to me, i do not want to give that up. at this point, ok, if you are raising my taxes, ok, but make sure that we take care of the debt. that is the big thing. i'm thinking and 10-20 years down the road.
i'm not be around then, but my children will be. host: ok, i appreciate the phone call. on twitter, he sent this out at 1:45 -- the senate voted around 2:00 a.m., early this morning, an unusual vote on a new year's eve. all to avoid tax hikes for the majority of americans, and also, delaying those automatic, across-the-board spending cuts to the pentagon and domestic spending. we are getting your take on that this morning with our coverage on a "washington journal." here is what the majority leader harry reid had to say earlier this morning before the vote. >> working through the night and throughout the day, we have reached a deal with senator mcconnell to avert tax increases on middle class americans. i have said all along to our
most important priority is to protect middle-class families. this legislation does that. middle-class families will wake up to date to the assurance that their taxes will not go up -- today to the assurance that the taxes will not go up $2,200 each. they will have the certainty to pay for groceries and car payments on next year. legislation protects 2 million americans lost their jobs during the great recession, losing their unemployment insurance. i'm disappointed that we were not able to make a grand bargain as we have for so long, but we tried. host: here is the headline in "the washington times." --
late into new year's eve, the criticism from the left was causing mr. biden had aches as he huddled with senate democrats to -- to persuade them to declare victory and raising taxes and accept a higher threshold. our cameras were in the senate is today as mr. biden made his way with the senate majority leader. there he is, making his way to a caucus meeting, where vice- president biden tried to sell the steel to his members, and he was able to get a majority of democrats to vote for this deal, all but three. the ap at this photo of the vice-president after that caucus meeting with all the rank-and- file. he came out and game -- and gave
a thumbs-up after he was able to talk to the rank and file. there he is. even though the house was on a session, the washington times reports that the country technical felt that this will cut. there is still little bit of time. -- allen in fairfield, illinois, republican caller. all of let's get rid of congress, fire them, vote them out of office. host: why is that? caller: they are not doing them -- doing what we want them to. host: which is what? caller: to the deficit down, and do what we put them in there to do. host: how should that be done, alan? caller: i'm not sure about that. host: social security, medicare,
medicaid? caller: they should be on the table, but not everything else. host: how do you get loring the debt and concur in the debt if medicare and social security are not on the table? they make up 40% of the budget. caller: you are right, but i think a flat tax ought to take care of everything. host: across the board? caller: ok, richard, democratic color in chicago. caller: $450,000 is not middle- class. that is rich. what you said about cutting social security and medicaid on the table, i believe they should be on the table. high income earners should not receive social security. they are rich. if you are rich, what you need
social security for? high-income earners do not need medicare, because they are rich. they have money. poor people need it. host: what you think about the president as a negotiator? he did not stick to the $250,000 threshold. caller: he sold democrats out. $450,000 is not middle class. host: people are seeing that there is another round coming up. they will have to deal with the debt ceiling, raising that, and also these automatic spending cuts. if what ever the senate passed last night is approved by the house, that means they're back at this in a couple of months. what do you think about the prospects of a president obama being able to hold his ground that? caller: i do not think he will. if he gave up four hundred $50,000 this round, what else will he give up? you are going to have to put
social security and medicare on the table. host: you differ from other democrats, who say, do not touch social security. caller: i look at it like this -- everybody has to have shared sacrifice. it has to be shared or else it will not work. host: joe in missouri, an independent color. caller: i have two questions -- is this supposed to last for five years? this bill? host: there are some provisions that last for five years. the tax credits as part of the stimulus -- caller: why would they do it for five years, because we got stuck with the ten-year deal with bush? if something comes up, he will change it. -- will they change it? host: that is a good question.
we will have to call lawmakers on the show tomorrow, nick mulvaney, a conservative, and earl blumenauer, a progressive liberal from oregon. if the house and up voting today, we will get their take on how they voted and why and what is in this legislation. those are good questions to have for the lawmakers tomorrow. we should do what the senate majority leader had to say before the vote, but here is also what senate minority leader of mitch mcconnell had to say earlier this morning. >> each of us could spend the rest of the week discussing what a perfect solution would have looked like, but the end result would have been the largest tax increase in american history. the president wanted tax increases, but thanks to this imperfect agreement, 99% of my constituents will not be hit by those hikes. it took an imperfect solution to
prevent our constituents from the very real financial pain, but in my view, it was worth the effort. as i said, this should not be the model for how we do things around here, but i think we can say and we have done some good for the country. we have done some good for the country. we have taken care of the revenue side of this debate. host: senator mitch mcconnell this morning about this book. the senate approved the measure 89-8. and most of the house or a vote could happen as early as this afternoon. they will be in around noon eastern time. keeper channel here for our coverage of the floor and the senate expected to come in around 2:00 p.m. eastern time. tune in to c-span2 for that. here is a tweet -- about that negotiation, the
negotiations between mcconnell and joe biden, here is an "the new york times" -- the senate voted on that deal again earlier this morning in an unusual new year's eve vote on this january 1, 2013. look for our coverage throughout the day of house action, if they take that up. we will go to bob in indiana, republican color. caller: happy new year. i think this is a lousy deal because none of this money will go towards the debt. it is just going to be for more
spending for this president, and we are spending ourselves down the drain, and that first caller, was no more republican than harry reid is. i hope you have a wonderful day. host: at sea in new york, democrat color. -- betsy in new york, a democrat caller. caller: i wanted to disagree that president obama called -- sold us out. he has been trying to get everybody to the table, and if disagreed, to offer their own ideas. ok, so the republicans want in one sense, -- won in one sense, in that the vice-president got a deal to go through. i do not think republicans were acting smart, because the fact that president obama was reelected, it will not benefit -- it will benefit them down the
road to show that they are cooperating. even though i am a black american, i have folks in my family disagreeing with me. might meese voted for mr. mccain. i was so shocked to see mr. mccann said there and clamp that president obama brought his cheering rally. i believe that america can come back. as it is in my household, i have an expanding what i have been bringing in and out paying the minimum balances. , for letting me put my opinion in there. i believe a guy everybody came to the table and acted as grown- ups, get over the fact that republicans cannot win this time around, but there is nobody i know that always boats strictly with their party. the bill for what is good for the country. host: republicans reportedly were very upset with the president's statements yesterday when he stood before the cameras with what he called middle-class
taxpayers behind him. as you said, john mccain king to the floor afterward and said that it was more campaigning. it could put in jeopardy anything that the house might do on this deal, as they are calling it, that the senate voted on earlier today. what do you think? caller: i think mr. mccain and others are being unnecessary and not truthful. they are ready planned not to agree. they have and twisting president obama's arm to get him to be a yes man and say, what do you want me to do? the fact that every time that they do these things, to go against the american people, they look for president obama to pretty much come out crying, but every time he put a good face on. as he said when he was running for president, sometimes you have to brush it off your shoulders.
thus president biden is doing a very well to work along with mr. obama, and he might reap some benefits in 2016. the republicans are still upset about not winning the election. i do know, and everybody knows, that there is still some racism in america, they cannot take the color of his face in the white house. it is done. it is crazy. let's go forward, and saved america. host: let me show you a little bit of an president obama's comments yesterday at the white house. >> keep in mind, last month, republicans in congress said they would never agree to raise tax rates on the wealthiest americans. the agreement that is being currently discussed would raise those rates and raise them permanently. host: president obama talking about what democrats won, potentially, in this deal. a writer for the nation -- "the
richard in capitol heights, maryland, an independent color. caller: thank you for taking my call. those people realize that this so-called fiscal cliff, but there is a reason why these tax cuts camp -- come up every year. it is so they can keep debating over the american people, to allow the american people to pay super rich people's america -- their taxes. i just do not get what people do not understand that this is why it comes up every year. that is what we will keep doing. this is what they are fighting for. it is wild. sexting dollar trillion of debt is bush and obama tax cuts -- $16 trillion that is the bush tax cuts that keep coming
up. the medicare plan be. that is the other is trillion dollars. we cannot rely on the american people to allow this to happen. host: a prediction of a possible vote later on today -- the a p noted in a story earlier this morning that tea party senators did approve, some of them, a couple of them, did approve this deal earlier this morning in the senate. also, the ap report in this morning that officials also decided at the last minute to use the measure to prevent a $900 pay raise for lawmakers to take effect this spring. that is something our callers often or not, the congressional salaries, that was also in this
bill. a poll was on our facebook pages today. -- page yesterday. should there be a compromise or should we go over the cliff? we had to under 39 people who said we had to forge a compromise. -- 239 people who said we need to form -- forge a compromise. a little fewer -- less people said that we needed to go over the cliff. we know they are able to retroactively deal with the tax hikes and build house were able to approve the deal by the senate and also delayed the automatic spending cuts from taking place for two more months. "the washington post" reports this morning --
the first time in late 2010 -- denise, from texas, republican color. -- caller. caller: about if we take all the people caught the roles of disability and social security who could work more than they do, again they were not one to lose their insurance and their other benefits that they get from being on disability -- those who could work but will not because -- is like getting
paid not to work. farmers paid not to farm. this is confusing. host: you were talking about some sort of grand bargain? caller: i am talking about common sense. if you can work, you should work. can you be paying taxes, instead of taking our money away from the pot. host: from," -- from kokomo indiana, an independent color. caller: john boehner has been refusing to bring up a bill in the house, or the senate, so i do not understand how he will take up this bill. host: the bill they took up on the -- on the floor was house passed a bill, they doubted it, and added this to language. that was how they were able to get around the constitutional
requirement. caller: they could've done that with the other bell, couldn't they? host: i dunno, i guess so. what you think of this maneuvering? caller: i think they should stop to the 250 as obama ran on. i also think that all income should be taxed the same, and the people who are doing capital gains should get taxed at the same right as rigid as everybody else. the key talking about class warfare and how we want to punish people that are making money. if it is punishment for them to pay a higher rate, that everybody else pays, then why is it not punishment for us? it seems like everybody is in the class warfare, thinking their class is better. host: have you been watching from the beginning? they did address capital gains and dividends, and what they did, according to this paper, is permanently increase tax rates
to 20% from the 15% current rate port single people with income over for injured thousand dollars and couples over for injured $50,000. -- four hundred thousand dollars and couples over the four hundred $50,000. -- $400,000 and couples over the $450,000. caller: what makes them any better? income is income, whether you make from real estate, labor, actively working, or from capital gains like they do. it is a different type of income. it should all be the same. host: you say they. who are they that pay capital gains and dividends? what do they do for a living in our mind? caller: a lot of them are stockbrokers, people from wall street.
host: speaking of wall street, this is of maryland business section -- and "the washington times" -- tim in maine, an independent color. -- caller. caller: i think is great the senate is starting to work together. i really think is great. i would like to see a national conversation on what it's costing us to be the policeman of the world. i think we could cut a lot of money there. that is not even being talked about. host: you think this incremental approach that they are taking is not such a bad thing? caller: no, it is not. for the last four years, they have not been able to get
anything. they cannot join lead to anything together. to see them starting to do that, i think is great. host: "the new york times" has a front-page story, this is the headline inside the paper -- they will have to deal with whatever comes out of this 112th congress. that is if the house later today takes up whatever the senate passed earlier this morning. right now, there are reports that the house is expected to do so. stay tuned to c-span2 what our coverage of the floor when they come and at noon. you can watch as the debate begins. you'll hear from lawmakers themselves. here is a court -- quote from another player --
james in oklahoma, a democratic caller. what is your take? caller: my question is, who is running this country? is it the president, the congress, or is it the american people? the american people break the back to survive on a daily basis. congress does not have that problem. i may not get to eat just because to feed -- just to feed my kids. congress does not have that problem. they do not share the problems. they do not care about our problems. all as long as they get with it and what they got. thank you. host: alex in georgia, republican color. -- caller. caller: happy new year to everybody. i think it is a win, ironically, for republicans. i think anybody of any common-
sense realizes -- i will even say you are going to say $300,000 and above, even for household, that is at the chairman among -- barrett minimal. that is upper-middle-class. ultimately that is a win. i want to commend vice-president abundant. i note some of my friends will get mad at me for that. he came in, and we still have to get the delegation from the house. we will have the defects of probably 60-70 republicans, a lot of them call themselves the party. -- the tea party. we need to start seriously addressing the big white elephant, and that number of $16 trillion. a big chunk of that is money we owe social security. i am tired of people talking on a social security as a sacred
cow not to be touched. i agree it is a situation where we have to give a reference to it -- reference to that, and a big chunk of money we owe so security could be taken from national defence. $100 billion or 200 -- or $200 billion out of national defence is not a big thing. i'm a u.s. navy veteran. you'll not find anybody who is more sympathetic to the military than myself. i served in japan during the reagan years. the bottom line is, i think we are making progress. i agree with what senator corker said last night, and we have to do things in a much more open a way to the public. i do not like the fact that things went behind closed doors, and i think things could have been debated on the floor. host: your prediction about a possible vote in the house
leader today -- you think there is a hundred gopers bat defect? caller: it is possible. i do not think it will be about 100, because based on the numbers, you said there are eight people that voted -- host: 89. caller: there are stalwart conservatives in the senate, like johnny isaacson and saxby chambliss -- host: and ron johnson who voted with tea party support. caller: let me to a slam down and mr. grover norquist. i appreciate his willingness to stand up for what he believes in. he has every right to that, but he is not an elected person. these candidates who signed off on some of these pledges to not raise taxes, they put their own
proverbial balls in the vice on this. i apologize for being graphic. that is not good politics. host: what is your take on the speaker and his role in the negotiations? [laughter] caller: the speaker is in the middle. i believe there were several people who have made the observation that they're sympathetic to where he is. here's the deal -- the american people cannot think fully grasp -- i do appreciate the fact that more people are paying attention to what is going on and learning more about the role of government and taking a civics lesson about what is going on. the fact is, the speaker has got to cut a deal. that sounds horrible to the very, very right-wing of the record and party who is on up on one agenda -- of the republican party who is hung up on one agenda. i thought it was very
insightful, the democratic caller who said everything has to be on the table. host: what you think about round two? caller: i like that you say that because it is not a done deal. something could be a serious monkey wrench, but right now, my gut is, if you want to look at it from a partisan hubble, i think the democrats still have the upper hand. they had to swallow a bitter pill at $400,000. i think that was a bitter pill. i think if nancy pelosi signed off on that, that means she has her crew. i suspect mr. banner will be able to put the deal together. he will not like that he will lose possibly 100 votes and will have to deal with more democratic votes. that will weaken him for the
pipe dream. it was a test vote. everybody in washington understands that. the american people do not understand a lot of that. that is unfortunate. thank god for shows like you guys do, and the valley -- and a valuable message and education you provide. that was a general test vote. it was a pipe dream. at the end of the day, mr. boehner and newt gingrich has been very public about this -- sure, it is not a great glorious, right-wing wind, but anybody worth their accounts -- their pounds and if, if you're making over $400,000 in a household, that is a win for republican families and people that make tons of money. i am sympathetic to boehner's position. he will not like it. tom price of georgia has said he will not run. i have not talked to his chief
of staff lightly, but i suspect they are pretty solid on that. cantor and those folks, at the end of the day, is boehner weekend? yes. at the end of the day, they will suck up and move on. the situation for the 113th congress, and about one month and half, they will start seriously trip -- chipping away at its $16 trillion deal. that is where the american people need to tighten the screws, and say, everything is on the table. a little over a year ago, i was at a national conference -- latigo so i can get it -- get in more voices. i want to pick up where you left off, one month or two months where they will have to vote to raise the debt ceiling. here is "the washington times today -- -- "the washington times" --
under $50,000 threshold. senator tom harkin -- $250,000 threshold. senator tom harkin voted against this agreement. he came to the vote and here is what he had to say. >> and is supported to say that in my opinion, this legislation that we are about to vote on, falls short. first, it does not address the number one priority -- creating good, middle-class jobs now. unemployment remains weak too high. this bill should include direct assistance and job creation measures, for example, our infrastructure, education, job retraining. how many jobs we see out there going open because people are not trained? host: senator tom harkin, democrat of iowa, who voted no on the mcconnell-by in
agreement. it goes to the house. -- mcconnell-by an agreement. -- mcconnell-biden agreement. this on twitter -- we're getting your take on what happened in the senate earlier this morning. our coverage continues on c-span and c-span2 for coverage of the senate floor. we have about 10 marmont -- 10 more minutes to keep talking to all of you about what the senate did. we will bring in a couple gusts. we will bring in a liberal perspective, as well as conservative perspective. keep the conversation rolling from this morning's three hour "washington journal." if you want to follow along the route the day, good to c- span.org/fiscalcliff. we have atrophied from reporters and others to find out what is
going on. as we learned here this morning, about a house vote, when, what time, we will keep you updated here as we continue to talk on a "washington journal." i need to give you some other news as we continue to route -- here is the national section of "the new york times" -- as many of you -- as many of you know, the secretary of state was hospitalized. the new york times reports -- "the new york times" reports -- treatment will continue even longer to prevent a recurrence. this type of clot is more common in women than among men. particularly with dehydration,,
but it is impossible to say what it -- what exactly caused it. given that she has had a blood clot in the past in 1998, she may be prone to form clots and the need a lifelong treatment to prevent them, possibly with low doses of aspirin or other blood thinning drugs. that is the latest and hillary clinton plus condition. the daily news in new york has this front page -- back to these so-called fiscal cliff talks, and your take on it, rich in new jersey, an independent color -- caller -- caller: number one, thank you for taking a call from an independent. we are all americans. it troubles me that we have to get to this point before there
is actually some kind of negotiation. i want our country to try and deal with the problems we have a rational basis to do what is best for everybody. republican or democrat, the way washington is one is out of control. these people cannot answer to anybody. i'm wondering why our politicians do not look at term limits, bringing other people in. i appreciate what a biden has done to be a moderator, but we have people in there who have been there -- i don't want to say centuries -- but too long. they live in a bubble away from what is normal people do in our daily life. i have to meet a payroll at my small-business, i have to put three or four children after a college education, and i do not get a day from any government program. i almost feel like our country is moving to a point where it is just special interests, outside
lobbyists, and people are those in the incentive to work hard and create a true american dream. that makes me more sad than anything. you have to appreciate what biden has done, but i also want to look at what is coming up. it is not only the fiscal cliff, but what will happen with the debt ceiling? there have to be changes, but people cannot to say, medicare, medicaid. our society is getting older. people are living longer. we need these programs. if you look at what is happening with medicare, if you cut medicare payments to physicians, it would have been a conundrum. people would have dropped out of the program. nobody would be there to provide service for medicare. we had people now who have a serious medical problems who are not to be able to receive care. we have obamacare. everybody has insurance, but nobody will provide it. then you have foreign lobbyists or dictating what occurs in our government. you have very rarely people --
politicians a lot to do the right thing. host: -- who want to do the right thing. host: what about -- hear on twitter -- caller: the obama campaign talked about wanting to put the clinton tax cuts back into effect. well, they went over that. i was watching something on your earlier, democratic senator talking about, the middle class is not $250,000, four hundred thousand dollars -- $400,000. people that make that much money, they have no idea what middle-class is. i started work when i was 18 years old.
i'm 21 now, and i have been laid-off. i work construction. in my part of the country, they're shutting down a cool completely. any ideas on this -- down coal ely.lettely any ideas on this? host: to our next caller. caller: the guy on your twitter feed, he talked about the balanced approach and a discussion on spending. the whole issue is pending. the democrats are winning the argument, for public appearances and everything. that is until we finally realize that we're spending so much money that has not even been a born yet. nothing will change. i am fascinated that harry reid has abdicated his obligation to lead the senate and what joe
biden, in to do his job. the big wants to do their job. they want our money, and they collect their money. host: joe biden was quoted in the washington post after he met with the democrats, the democrat rank-and-file. he said this -- as we continue to get your take out of washington this morning on this january 1, 2013, the senate, in a high heat -- in a
highly unusual new year's eve vote, approved 89-8 a short-term measure to avoid tax hikes on the majority of americans. we will keep the conversation going. coming up next, a writer from "the nation." ♪ >> in the summer of 1991, they could have breakfast with sperling, a washington correspondent for "the christian science monitor." he has this regular meeting with politically important people. they raise the issue of the rumors of bills -- bill's philandering. hillary said, i wanted to know that we have had troubles in our married lives, but we love each
other, we believe in each other, and i love my husband, and we will stick together for the rest of our lives. there were blown away. what they do not know, and what neither of the clintons know, is that nine months later when a bill is soaring in the polls, at that very moment, flowers says she has had a 12-year love affair with bill clinton. >> bill chase and how the clinton's relationship benefit in the political ambitions. that is tonight at 10:00 eastern. that continues squadder days of nonfiction authors on booktv. -- four days of nonfiction authors on booktv.
"washington journal" continues. host: we're back with george zornick. what you think of this deal was reached in the senate last night? caller: is a crazy time we live in. what happened last night is absent of meaning without the or thent's signature house. you had the sequester go into effect, which would raise $1.20 trillion in revenue or save as much to budget savings. what congress is doing now, what the senate did last night, is basically undo quite a bit of that deficit reduction. the will and do quite a bit of the tax cuts, but will put up the sequester, so while there are playing these deficit gains and and doing a lot of the work, it is happening in the context of what is a real jobs crisis in
this country. they are paying -- aire playing these deficit kings back and forth, while the real crisis is unemployment. host: not -- a bad deal? caller guest: he was telling liberals that they will hold a firm and this is what they want. nobody believed that would hold exactly to that figure. they got about half of what they were asking for. host: what has been the reaction from liberal groups? guest: they have been against it. it looks like it might be effective in the senate. i'm not sure it will be powerful
in the house later today. host: do you think nancy pelosi can deliver the votes? guest: we know the republicans will lose some number of votes. marco rubio voted against it. that is a sign of unrest. i have talked to some staffers in the progressive caucus. host: we have a tweet from the head of the afl-cio. host: that from richard trumka ahead of last night's vote, illustrating some distress among
the progressive groups. guest: obama has not address the debt ceiling. this was another thing he was going to do. it.not when --he didn't win you have done the revenue and change the estate tax. that is done. you are going into the negotiations without many avenues. there will not negotiate on the debt ceiling. sherrod brown said they were going with tit. whitehouse said the same thing earlier.
obama said they want an end to the high jinks. host: what is your take on president obama's role in negotiating so far? guest: i think he has a strong impulse to reach a deal. his priorities to reaching a deal is surpassing his desire to stand up for progressive principles. to protect parts of the government from harmful cuts that would hurt a lot of regular americans. host: republicans saw his news conference as unusual. john mccain said he should not know if he should be mad or sad. guest: the white house
anticipated a lot of progress of deal. over this they knew there would be concessions. he was trying to fire up the team, slam-dunking on republicans to make it seem like a partisan fight. i think that probably worked. john mccain complained. a lot democratic rally to the cause. host: joe biden made his way to the senate last night. do you know? guest: he played a lot of concerns about the debt ceiling -- he allayed a lot of concerns
about the debt ceiling. if republicans would refuse to raise the debt ceiling and if obama throws down the gauntlet, i'm not sure we would not hit it. there is a lot of the senators who went into the meeting saying, we cannot go for this. host: we have a tweet. guest: i believe it will but not as much as everybody hoped. obama was asking for $1.2 trillion. there was a major concession on the estate tax.
they ended up agreeing to a $5 million cut off and a 40% taxation rate. that is a significant chunk of revenue. host: it seems republicans are nervous as well. this is a conservative blog. "it is an enigmatic riddle for you. you get tax hikes and no spending cuts. in fact, we will spend even more as a result of this deal." guest: i think democrats are
coming out on the losing end. the rates have already gone ou up. they are essentially agreeing to a tax rate and not getting any spending cuts for it. between now and around two, they will get beat up by a lot of their members. there will be sweating through this vote today. host: we have a tweet from bill king. thomas, you are on the air. caller: good morning. happy new year. we say that most of the
politicians are looking down the road at the 2014 election. they had to vote for this because -- they put down the two month for the sequestration. that is going to affect the employment base of the entire governments. they do not phrases like that. they are talking about laying off people and that will increase the unemployment rate. the tax-cut measure that they did. nobody making $40,000 a month needs a tax breaks. we discussed the tax thing in an earlier program.
the middle class is paying for it. i didn't understand that liberals do not band together stronger and show a united force. it is okay to have obama as the president. if we say the president is caving in, we have power. guest: we have seen 26 straight months of private sector job gains. we have seen losses in the public sector. you can expect that public unemployment problem to get worse. progressives can get behind the president and claimed a win over the republicans.
or they can hold out for the progressive principles that they originally wanted. i think in congress a lot of folks will wind up back in the president. host: guestok. good morning, steve. caller: happy new year. everybody is talking about going back to the clinton's tax brackets. do you think that is a good idea? andt: go back to the 1990's everybody did quite well. tic talk. apocalyps
it is not all that much debilitating when people tend to save the money rather than spend it. a lot of the talk about what will happen if we go back to those rates simply is not true. we saw quite a bit of economic growth. host: john from north carolina tweets in -- guest: that will be what a lot of people are going to sweat to. they are getting no spending cuts. that is a hard sell for a lot of people. they rejected a bill and told boehner that would not support a bill that pushed the tax rates up to a million dollars.
that is a win in some ways for them. host: what do you make about the statement that said the house will honor its commitment to consider the senate agreement if it is passed. host: this is a joint statement. guest: the republican bishop wants this to pass. it would be problematic if we go further over the cliff. they have a lot nervous conservative members that do not want to feel they are getting steamrolled by boehner. "we hear your concerns and are
willing to listen." they are giving the conservatives time to air their grievances. host: we have this on twitter. george from arizona. caller: hi. thank you for taking my call. the last caller made one of my points. if you're making $9,000 a week and cannot afford to pay a little bit more -- there is no sense of country anymore. everybody wants to grab what they want to grab. the taxation in this country was more than 39% when our country was in trouble in the past. anybody that can afford it needs to pay 50%, 60%, 70%.
a friend of mine makes all his money in capital gains. "it is kind of tragic you're only paying 20%." he said, i would be willing to pay more. he cannot spend all of his money. guest: historically taxation is at an all-time low. taxation is at an all-time low particularly for the wealthiest and the tea party is not acknowledging that. the effective tax rate is going down and down and down. people like to talk about the kitchen table conversation about
the country's debt. you have to talk about bringing in more revenue plus whatever spending cuts if you can make without further damaging the economy. taxation is too low. host: carl, you are on the air. caller: good morning. happy new year. this is not a good deal. this shifts the bull's-eye on to entitlements. you have precluded any other stream for revenue. they will be looking to make all the cuts now to address our deficits. that is the only place you can go to now.
column. guest: i have a few problems with that. he is in a tricky place on medicare and medicaid. he does not want to hurt beneficiaries. he proposed $700 billion in savings to the program that didn't hurt beneficiaries and saw mitt romney and paul ryan- bash him. he is in a tough position. in some ways obama and liberals could allow the government to negotiate drug prices under par t d. that would be a significant savings. there are ways to do it.
host: rick from texas. caller: good morning and happy new year. my wife and i got in severe credit card debt in 2008. i went to my boss and said, "i need a raise to pay off some of my expenses." he said, "you have not been more productive." i went to my father, a successful businessman. i asked him to bail me out. he had a lot of money. he did not earn it.
it was the people that purchased the vehicles. he used terms like "personal responsibility" and that i had to pay off my own debt. host: we got your point. guest: the economy is bad. the government has to pay out more in benefits. one way to get the government to spend less is to spend more to stimulate the economy. what obama was trying is serious stimulus to boost the economy. if you think of the federal government that is someone that
has to balance its books, that is the obama approach and i think it is a good one. host: lesley from missouri. caller: i helped barack obama become elected. i notice the nation is not behind him. they are not making the money that people at the top are making. when the people at the top try to negotiate will happen for the people at the bottom, there will be a constant setback of growth . when you have politicians not taking care of business, you have more outgrowth then you have in ccome.
right now our country has more outgrowth then in come. if you don't have that overhead, you end up losing what you have. host: george zornick. guest: a lot of people like to talk about world aid. you could look at the defense budget. many liberals have tried to do that. it appears the defense sequester will be avoided. it is kind of tricky. it is an across-the-board cut. you have the same amount coming out there as you do in these ridiculous weapons systems.
there are a lot of liberals that like to keep that number we appropriate or those cuts are going. "let's target the cuts say little bit." host: referring to round two after the senate approved a short-term measure to avoid tax hikes. they decided to delay sequestration for about two months and deal with it once they start negotiating again. that means the new congress will get to vote on this. so these outgoing members will vote today in the house and it will be new members. guest: that is somewhere where the democrats have a beit an advantage.
people like tammy baldwin, tim kaine coming in and replacing more moderate members. the margin get smaller. that may be one reason why republicans are eager to deal before the 113th congress. many of the tea party members like allen west have also lost so they will be alloweout. host: all eyes moved to the house for legislative business. a vote could happen on legislation that was approved early this morning in the senate. coverage on c-span continues throughout the day. jimmy, you are on the air.
caller: good morning and happy new year. when i look at the statue at the white house, that is supposed to represent the american people. democrat, republican, we're supposed to do what is right for the country. one thing i have to ask. the people that makes the most money in this country -- why we cannot create jobs to revenue for the country. it takes individuals to create work for them. guest: this is what a lot of progress are worried about. washington is trying to deal with a long-term debt problem
that will be a problem for some time. nobody thinks the country will fall off into financial district. next year. they are doing so in a way that is sitting like it will hurt the average american more than the wealthy. you'll see a lot tax raises on the wealthy. this is much less than they were being asked to pay. you have a minimal kick in from the wealthy. you may see cuts to things like social security, medicare, medicaid, domestic spending like head start that will be out of whack with what the wealthy will be asked to pay.
this is exactly what progress is are worried about. host: no one is sounding happy in washington on this new year's morning. george zornick of "the nation" giving his perspective. we have a tweet from justin amash. george zornick? guest: republicans are in a tough spot. they have spent all the last campaign arguing that raising the rates on top earners would be devastating to the economy. only about 3% of small businesses would be affected. now republicans will prove these tax increases on top earners
they have been rattling against for so long. host: hi, kathy. caller: hello. we are not close to the spending rate for the government as back when clinton was in office. otherwise we're feeding the beasts. when it comes to having the higher tax rates on the wealthy , that might solve some of the problems but it will not solve all the problems. the economy needs to get going and there needs to be more jobs. i have not seen much in the administration doing anything to help incentivize that in the private sector. part of the problem is the mentality of greed. the government is greedy for
more money. it doesn't help when those who have taken advantage of the system, there has been no trials are people going to jail. no investigations. i think you can influence people. it has happened during our recent election. we can change the mentality of pay. if you have what you need, how about giving? giving to your neighbor. that solves both problems on both sides of the aisle. guest: to get people off welfare, there is the republican approach which would cut their benefits. you have told these people, sorry, you are on your own.
another way is to stimulate the economy to the point where they do not need it. it is in the long term a good way to reduce spending on welfare programs. host: heidi fox on twitter has this tweet for us. guest: that seems to be the way that washington works. republicans refused to vote for a bill two weeks ago. today there will likely support a bill that extends them only up to $450,000. the difference is we are over the fiscal cliff. host: elizabeth in texas, hi.
caller: yes. host: happy new year. caller: [indiscernible] you do not want to tax yourself. host: hard time understanding you. sorry about that. cedric in south carolina. you are on the air. .ood morning caller caller: we do not have a tax problem. we have a wage problem. you get people like lindsey graham going around and telling his constituents we have to cut
the military. you have the one that voted for the military. it just doesn't make any sense. we have a wage problem. thank you and have a nice day. guest: i think he is right. so many people are doing poorly and qualifying for government benefits. there are bills to raise the minimum wage. there will be stimulative measures that democrats will ask for. it helps people out and is a good way to reduce government spending by spending it now and stimulating the economy. host: hudson, new hampshire, good morning. caller: i am ashamed to be a
republican. i've been a republican since i was young. i was proud to be a republican. now i'm so ashamed. these people are something else. there is a discrimination from the high class and middle class. it's not right. everybody should be paying the same thing. i thought discrimination should be against athe law. the people supposedly working for the people are getting paid so much money for being in the position that they are in and they need to take a deduction. i get a kick out of mitt romney.
he was making fun of everybody. this is terrible and i think something should be done about it. guest: i think progressives agree there should be more equality in with the wealthy pay and what the less wealthy pay. they have raised the rates on the entrances to the estate tax. i think she is looking for a flat tax level where everybody pays the same. timor you learn, the more you kick in to help others. -- the more you earn, more you can to help others. host: somebody happy about the
deal on twitter. ke.st: there's a lot to lig unemployment extension is huge. that is a big boost to the economy. people will be better set up to find a job later. host: we are talking about two million people. guest: the earned income tax credit was extended for five years. no cuts in the deal to medicaid and social security. you have the top rates at a higher threshold and extended.
there's a lot of gloss you can put on this. there is more benefits for our side than the others. host: lynne is next. caller: i wanted to ask the guest about his previous comments that there were higher rates and prosperity under clinton. bill clinton participated with the legislatures and help balance the budget and he was gung-hu towards small business. i think those are differences from the current administration. guest: the obama administration has passed 17 small business tax cuts at this point.
a lot of them are very wealthy companies that are not small businesses. i think the record has shown that he has negotiated with this congress. many think too much. he has cut in the steel and wanted $1.2 trillion and is walking out with $600 billion. host: a democratic caller from florida, pete. caller: i do not know why everybody is so gloom. the owners in this country should be happy. you still keep your tax cut.
you know these people, bain capital, mitt. are loaded with accounts they do not pay taxes on. the country has lost jobs. apple computer does not pay taxes. they are laughing. people that lost their jobs are held hostage. and ceo knows darn well, i'm going to make my profits and so the bottom line to my shareholders is a home run. i stood in line for mr. obama to vote for him. i'm kind of disappointed. he should show those eight
senators that voted against this to ask them why. they bring a bunch of millionaire senators saying why we have to sacrifice and laughter the poor and in comments. they never talk about the cayman islands bank accounts where they are able to laugh like crazy. host: here are the senators that voted no this morning. you have three democratic , along with republican senators -- george zornick. guest: i was surprised more
democrats did not vote against it. i think pete raised a couple of good points. this deal will not talked some of the offshore and he spoke of. the next that will be corporate tax reform to close the loopholes and the of shoring. the obama approach is to take to savings and put that into lowering the tax rates. one way to address this would be to close the loopholes and use some of the savings to invest in the economy can invest in social insurance and help out people that are looking for jobs. host: a lot of focus about
speaker boehner's role. this is being called the biden- mcconnell plan. what do you make of mitch mcconnell's role? guest: he is up in 2014. his story about a primary from his right. hard right republicans are not particularly fond of mcconnell. he has to walk a fine line, as does john boehner. he had a few of these guys fote vote no. that's not the same as john boehner, who didn't have the votes in his caucus. the tea party republicans
refused to back anything that would give an inch to the white house. host: harry reid did not have a role in these negotiations. guest: harry reid could not get his caucus to go along with the threshold. reid was not able to bring along a lot of his members to the deal. so biden stepped in. redid on board now. he refused to put social security on the table. the left is pretty pleased with how harry reid dealt with this. host: nancy pelosi supposedly signing off on this agreement.
joe biden got most of the rank- and-file to approve this. now action moves to the house. is michael on twitter -- this is michael on twitter. guest: all revenue measures have to originate in the house. they put in the new language and sending it to the house ought to be approved. which is legal and is a funny tricks they have to do. i expect it to come up to a vote early this afternoon. host: here is a posting from red state.
guest: if i were a republican, i would tell my fellow republicans they should get behind this deal. you are taking away the white house's leverage on tax rates. then talk about the sequester. you will be able to win the cuts. i realize that is pretty long- term thinking for a short-term problem. host: charles from florida. caller: good morning. i'm becoming more and more concerned about america. i think we have more class
warfare and the democrats are doing a super job blaming the rich and saying they should pay more and 50% of the population pay nothing. i am 72 years old. we had a difficult time making ends meet as a youngster. we would pick apples on weekends to find a way to keep ourselves warm and food in the house. .ut today you don't have to you can get food stamps. you can live a pretty good life without doing anything. unless something changes, we are in deep trouble. host: final thoughts.
guest: i think it is fair to ask for it deficit reduction deal. you had rates on the very wealthy at an all-time low. 47% of people unable to pay because they don't earn enough to pay. so what you have is a scenario in which the wealthy are doing very well and should kick in a little more. deficit reduction seems like a fair way to approach that. there are millions more people than available jobs. host: george zornick, thank you. late night for you.
guest: i spent more time on new year's eve that i would have cared to. host: thank you for getting up early. next up, the conservative perspective from charles hurt. first a news update. >> john boehner is not endorsing the agreement on the so-called fiscal cliff. he has promised to vote on it right away. he is expected to encounter opposition. one camp earlier said, "it's three strikes in my book and i will be voting no on this bill." the legislation would impose a hardship and fall short on addressing the need in spending. president obama praised the
agreements. coats to place on the other side of the capital on issues other than the so-called fiscal cliff. -- votes took place on the other side of the capital. extra cash for the fight against al qaeda and the fight against foreign governments trying to spy on the united states. mike rogers said the bill holds personnel levels at last year's level. dutch ruppersberger said the bill invests in programs that are working and cuts things that are not. the house meets today at noon eastern. watch the house live on c-span tv. those are some of the latest
headlines on c-span radio. [video clip] >> a lot of people that i know looking back on the last 40 years will say that ever since apollo, the space program has been a jobs program. how many jobs can we get in your district, in your state? the space shuttle passed by one vote because it was passed all around the country. we had people working different -- working in different places. i can tell you some pretty brutal stories about the politics that get involved in our space program. and it's "bring home the bacon," and the bacon is jobs because jobs get votes, and votes keep a congressman or senator in office. >> tuesday night at 8:00, apollo astronaut buzz aldrin on
the past and future of space exploration, followed at 9:00 with a debate on responding to a nuclear iran. and at 10:40, from brown university, polling and the 2012 presidential election. tuesday night on c-span. >> "washington journal" continues. host: happy new year, charles hurt. what is your take on this deal? guest: i think it is a monumental mess. the notion you will take this entire problem and put it on to 2% of businesses. work.t think it will the president said this is the beginning of tax hikes and that
we'll have more next year. i think he will keep going back to more and more people until they get it down to the earners of $250,000 and above. it is a tough sell for republicans and house. i do not think it will have as much support in the house that we saw in the senate. i'm blown away by the republicans that voted for this. speaker john boehner has run an open job compared to previous speakers. he has let a lot of things go on the floor.
he has been far less of the hammer then some of his predecessors. i think that's what he is going to do at this time. i think he will put it on the floor and say, vote however you want. joe biden and president obama will work that very hard. i think they will get more democratic support and far less republican support. this bill does not include spending cuts. it postpones the cuts that everybody agreed to for two bomonths. raising more money there are no cuts to be found in any of
it. it is the pain free deal we tend to see. host: let's stick with a possible vote in the house today. the senate approves it at 2:00 a.m. this morning. we are hearing it could be taken up as early as this afternoon and the house. you think it doesn't get as much support. what does it mean for the speaker? guest: i think it is a double- edged sword for him. he is -- it is a terrible situation for him. he doesn't like it. may vote for it -- he may vote
for it but he doesn't like it. it is worse than the bill he tried to profit a week or so ago. far worse for republicans or conservatives. it is in -- what he is saying is, does vote for this or whatever. he could hold the bill up and single-handedly stop it. . don't think he will do that there were 89 votes in support of it in the senate. that would suggest that it is pretty overwhelming support. he would not look all that good if he were to stop something like that. in that respect, i do think that
conservatives could say -- he will get some kind of contest in speakership in the re-election. he has been evenhanded about this stuff. there are a lot of complaints among some of the more conservative members of the house. he has not been -- he has tried to give them what they want. a lot of conservatives may view him as the best possible deal they could hope for. host: how is mitch mcconnell looking to the right? guest: this is a bad deal for conservatives. he is a very smart tactician.
he is willing to make unpopular stands to get what republicans want. this deal is a terrible deal. i think a lot of conservatives will say, "if nothing happened we would be in a better position." he made a number of fumbles along the way that got us to this place. i think at the moment he is getting a little bit more ire from conservatives. host: what did you make of the present's news conference? -- of the president paused news conference?
guest: he comes out and says which is all need to work together and stop trying to score political points. then he goes on to trash the motives of republicans. "we believe in something. you have your mandate. we have our mandate." i find that to be small and petty. this is it high point for him. still he got is a fantastic -- this deal he got is a fantastic deal. he is going to have to go back to people and raise more taxes. he said this is not going to work. i think he was lying down the
marker. this may not cause a general outcry from people across the political spectrum. when he goes after these other people that will be outraged by this will wake up. host: let's listen to what he had to say. [video clip] >> if republicans think i will finish the job of deficit reduction through spending cuts to trywe're just going to shove only spending cuts down -- well -- [laughter] shove spending cuts at us that will hurt seniors or hurt students or hurt middle class families without asking
equivalent sacrifice from millionaires or companies with a lot of lobbyists. if they think that will be the formula, they have another thing coming. that's not how it is going to work. it will have to be a matter of shared sacrifice. host: charles hurt? guest: the degree of disingenuous there. spending cuts alone -- where are the spending cuts? host: he is talking about round two. guest: i get that. this was a speaking technique where he talked about all these
spending cuts and suggest we have been awash in spending cuts. it is a bill clinton technique and he did a good job of it. it makes everybody forget that we do not have any spending cuts. that is one thing we are not addressing. host: liberals are not happy either. "this is a bad deal for us. what is left on the revenue side?" guest: i do agree on that. this is the high water mark for president obama and four liberals and it will get worse for them here on hout. say it will be better going forward is different than saying it is already bad.
i don't think anybody could look at the present situation except for conservatives in the senate that see this as a deal worth voting for and that blows my mind. maybe they see something differently than most conservatives to do, but the current situation is far worse for conservatives than liberals. though, it is a good point that it will get worse for them going forward, i think. host: "the new york times" reports -- guest: they are weary.
they have been working so hard for us. i wonder if some conservatives, tom coburn, who is a very principled conservative in the senate from oklahoma, i guess what a lot of them thought was at least this is in the direction of a balanced budget, which is far better than 90% of the stuff that goes on around you, and that allowed them to vote for it. it does not progress the bigger issues, and it will not come as president obama told us, solve the problems. they will have to go back to the well and after more people. host: let's give viewers involved. from twitter -- what else was inside the bill the side the tax
bill? what other bad laws are in this? guest: i do not know the particulars. final the boehner -- i know the boehner attempt that tried to make permanent for $1 million and below, that included some smart tech -- tax issues that would have closed loopholes and made part of the tax code more fair. i do not think that is included in this one. it was cobbled together quickly, and, of course, behind closed doors. to go back to your question about speaker boehner, that is another thing -- he has attempted to do a lot of stuff in the open. you might not like him or the things he is voting for if you
are in the republican congress, but that is a positive thing for people, especially conservatives that feel left out of the process. let things get done in the open. that is worth a lot. host: mike has been waiting in misery. democratic caller. -- missouri, democratic caller. caller: raising the taxes on the rich, i think it is i'm a democrat, but i think there is a trend going on with people on welfare. no two couples, hud pays rent, they get food stamps, the husband and wife get medicaid, and they are able to work. at the end of the year, they say
they worked so much, and they did income back off. i think they need to start cracking down on the welfare programs. that would save a lot of money. host: charles hurt? guest: i think that is the primary problem the conservatives see with the set up. you're trying to fix the revenue problem, which will not be fixed by going after 2%, raising their taxes to 80% -- it will not fix the problem. the real problem is they are not cutting the government in any real way, and among the ways you cut the government is you go after programs better abuse, or worse than that, programs that create an environment where it
is easier for people to give in to dependency on the government then make hard decisions about working and things like that. helping those people find good work, not only does that say you money, but it makes them productive workers, taxpayers citizens, and a better life for everyone involved. that is how i would argue it. that is certainly not the way we are addressing this. host: the republican line. gary. virginia. caller: good morning. i would like to read a short quotation from abraham lincoln
-- "you can not help the poor by destroying strengthen the weak by weakening the strong, you cannot lift the wager by pulling down the wage payer, you cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence, and you cannot help people permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves." president obama likens himself to abraham lincoln, but i think he needs to review this. guest: he might be familiar with that quotation, but i have not heard him use it. that was a long time ago. one of the most unseemly things about the press conference with president obama yesterday was when he talked about jacking
the taxes on the wealthy, and the people in the audience applauded. it is pitch fork-like -- how you would enjoy that some sucker in a different tax bracket has to pay more to cover your debt, it is unseemly. it is very odious. obviously, it is working for president obama. host: here is a tweet -- this half-hearted attempt to quiet the majority, does it mean tax reform is not going to happen? guest: god bless you for bringing that up. once again, we have come up with a half-measure that does not solve the problem, and most importantly, puts all the
pressure off of doing something real about, say, tax reform. there could be little pieces in this bill but they came up with, but it is certainly not to the degree speaker boehner tried with the other deal before christmas, and certainly not the really big, over-arching theme that would clear up a lot of these loopholes and make it a much more fair system. host: one thing that is included is a permanent fix to the alternative minimum tax, something bad -- that they have not been able to do. what do you make of that? guest: it is interesting. congress usually aids to permanently fix anything --
hates to permanently fix anything because as long as something is broken, they can use this distorted, sausage- making process that we have seen for a long time. i am sort of surprised by that because it runs counter to the way this place works, or maybe they are just tired of dealing with it, and talking about the amt ta is notx scary anymore. host: on twitter, i doubt this can pass the house. it is a sickening deal. we are greece. sam, ryan chilcote among the, california. -- rancho cucamonga, california.
forget thats not vice-president dick cheney said this matters, and corporate profits are up, wages are down, so working people deserve to be paid more. as far as welfare, when you have corporate welfare, nobody seems to be upset about corporate welfare. if you're going to cut government, let's start by cutting government contracts by these over-bloated defense contractors, cut defense by 20% and have them earn their fair share. guest: it is a little over- simplified to say republicans did this themselves. the democratic congress has done more to balloon the deficit than
any before, the republicans did this with wars. they were supposed to be painless for those lucky enough to not have to fight in them. they were not paid for. i think that was disasters. republicans lost their moral standing because of that. the argument about deficits and not nattering, they do not matter when they are at a certain level, but they do matter at this level. when debt service alone takes up your generalof fund spending, be banned it is a calamitous -- and then it is a calamitous situation. the country and republicans as
the conservative brand would be in better shape right now if they said we had to go to war in afghanistan and iraq, and everybody is going to feel this. we will pay for it as we go. that would have been wise, the right thing and the conservative thing to do, but they did not, and people laugh at them now. the caller is able to blame it all on them, which i think is a little unfair, but they are being mocked and ridiculed host: if you are just waking up on this new year's morning, the senate, very early, around 2:00 a.m. eastern time, approved a measure. the house comes in at noon, and a vote could happen as early as this afternoon.
jeff, you are on the air with charles hurt. caller: good morning. i in a blue dog democrat, but i am a democrat. charles talked about what i was going to talk about -- two words that we spent $2 billion a week on. if we could use that money for stimulus, build schools, six bridges, get this country -- fix bridges, and get this country back to the 21st century, get the highways go in again, that would put an awful lot of people to work. if we could do that, it would definitely come rolling in for these people that could make a decent wage on the construction
side. guest: i am not a big believer. these government stimulus plans have not worked very well. republicans like them because they can give a lot of these moneys to contractors, who support them. all of that is the fairest. if you look at the stimulus programs in the last couple of years, they have not worked well, but the caller is right. if that money were in private hands, in the economy, in the hands of taxpayers, that, in my book, -- the best stimulus program is when people have money back, invest and hire people.
>> there are some 2009 stimulus provisions included in this deal. extends tax cuts for the stimulus law for five years, including the child tax -- we are learning right now that the cbs news correspondent for capitol hill reports a vote could come as early as 1:00 p.m. today. guest: it is done. if the democrats get that, and a half to get 20 or 30 house republicans, i do not think it will have trouble with that. i feel pretty certain you might have a case where you have the majority of house republicans oppose this, which going back to
your question about speaker boehner, that is not a good -- host: over 100 index -- 100? guest: absolutely. i would never have predicted that, but people are anxious to get home, or whatever, they often make stupid tauruses. one point a wanted to go back to the choices. one point i wanted to go back to, one of the callers talking about corporate welfare -- the primary way corporate welfare is distributed is through these tax loopholes, and the way they are able to hide income or not paid taxes because they do certain things the government approves of. you know, if you want to do away
with corporate welfare, the primary way to do that is to reform the tax code, and as a twitter person pointed out, that is not willing to happen as part of this deal -- going to happen as part of this deal. host: richard, marietta, ga., you just heard charlie heard reacting to the news that all the democrats plan to vote for this. this could be a good deal -- done deal. caller: i do not like the sound of this being a done deal. i would like to see them take out the extension of the unemployment benefits. i know somebody that was all worked for 99 weeks, as soon as their benefits were up, they have a job. what are your thoughts on them passing out, kicking out the
unemployment extension? guest: i agree that they keep extending the unemployment benefits, and people around here, they never consider that it could lead to bad behavior, to people gaming the system, and not only is that bad for taxpayers, but it is bad for people that are allowed to do that. in this environment, this economy, these people will never man up and woman up and do that kind of thing because it would be perceived as kicking the poor. they are afraid of their own shadow. if you took a phone book and took the top 535 people out of
the phone book, 90% of the people would say we only have this much money, let's figure out how to do this, they would figure it out in about a week toward because of these people here, that never happens. host: speaking of politics, a tweet -- how will tim scott vote? not sure of the politics here. guest: they're talking about the recent appointee of nikki haley in south carolina. he strikes me as the type of person that would vote against it because he is a fairly conservative republican. host: he will be replacing jim demint in the senate, who is
stepping down. jim demint, one of three that did not vote last night. guest: i do not know if that means he was not here, or he abstained. -engine, -- i imagine he could not have voted to support this. host: donna, independent caller. caller: my concern is that i am basically lost in the cracks. i was a hard worker, paid my taxes, i had an accident, and now i have cancer. i get my medicare, but still i
am having to pay for more insurance. my social security check went up, but i have to pay the high price of medical care because of the bills, and it is not fair because i can not get supplemental insurance to help me pay for my disease. i do not think it is fair enough to where i am lost in the crack, and i can barely make it. all of my money goes directly to medical costs. guest: i'm sorry to hear about that, if a tragedy, but she points out the problem. when you go after 2% of the taxpayers and small businesses to fix the problems better on our shoulders, it is picking the
winners and losers. it happens on the other end as well. when you say we will pay for unemployment insurance, all of these things, at some point you have to cut the wind off because there is not enough money to take from this side to pay for the free stuff on that side. there will always be somebody on the line like the caller, who is every bit as justified as the neighborhood who earns $10 less than hurt or whatever, but because politicians in washington are picking the winners and losers were drawing the lines, you will -- or drawing the lines, you will wind up with on fears situations, and with people who will become -- wind up with unfair situations,
and people who will become better and take it out on these people. i look forward to that day. maybe others do not read host: c-span democrat as this tweet -- government stimulus kept us out of the depression. guest: i do not agree with the premise that the stimulus did that. we could go through and find countless examples of where this money was wasted, or it went to people -- take for example the green energy business. . -- you have hundreds of millions of dollars going to favored companies, favorable to the government because of their ideology and what they want to do. to look at the massive loss and
waste, and there are criminal investigations into some of these operations -- not only is it an horribly unfair way of redistributing hard-earned income, but it does not work. these companies are laying people off and shutting down, and in some cases i saw were a couple of these big companies, the chinese have come in and bought them and have taken the equipment back to china. what that amounts to is we gave china a leg up by building the company, and when it goes bankrupt we have to handed over to china, as if they do not have enough advantage is. host: chester, pa., karen. caller: happy new year, and
thank you for c-span. the original stimulus money went to the banks, and the banks would not lend, so everybody suffered. then george bush gave everyone a stimulus in their hand, they went to walmart to spend it, and the chinese still got it. then, the businesses that do have money, they are not making jobs. they are investing in hedge funds and credit default swaps. guest: the best example of failed stimulus, and this is both under republicans and democrats, just clinging to a life raft, -- biggest gave all of this money to banks, and they
stopped the lending because a lot of the reckless lending that led to all of this was due to reckless lending. companies and banks sitting on the sideline with cash -- any company that has cash right now, it is a turbulent economy, and it would be reckless to do anything but sit on the cash because they do not know what is going to happen, and the same applies for the lack of clarity on taxes for the next year. it is the wise thing to do, sit on cash because you do not know what your tax bill is going to be, how much longer the economy will be in disastrous shape. host: "the hill" is reporting
this with house gop setting a 1:00 p.m. conference meeting. we are learning that house gop rank-and-file will gather for a conference meeting. boy, would you like to the inside of that conference meeting. guest: indeed, but my hunch is it will not be a raucous affair. i would assume speaker boehner would have a hands-off approach, and say, "guys, i did my best, this came down the pike, we try to come up with the deal, and not get it done." we should have realized that was the danger. at the time, speaker boehner
said to the president and harry reid, the senate needs to send something our way, and we will deal with it. i thought it was a humble and honest approach. now, they got it, and i do not think they're going to like it. host: again, the house comes into session around noon eastern time. keep your television on c-span as we continue our coverage of the so-called fiscal cliff. tactically, we went over the cliff, but all reports are if this deal is approved by the house, they could retroactively fixed the tax hikes, and also before the sequestration or automatic spending cuts kick in wednesday, the have another day to deal with that as well. guest: nothing means anything around here. they can legislate things
backward and forward, and make sure nobody feels any pain. it is incredible. host: a couple of more phone calls for charles hurt. mary. caller: i would like to point out to all of the democrats that are appeased this morning that he raised taxes on the rich, that all he has really done it is fed you a line because when he refuses to do away with the loopholes, and make the tax is fair, i mean, that is how they get away with not paying taxes -- although loopholes. basically, he has played to both sides. guest: it was said the problem with socialism is you run out of other people's money. again, that is what president obama told us yesterday -- we
will run out of other people's money by what is now this year, and he will head to go back to the well, and lower the threshold for texas. i was thinking, greta, what would be a great idea -- currently there is no tax on political campaigns, but a wonderful incentive to make the tax code more fair is if they levied a tax on political campaigns. after all, they usually raise many millions of dollars. it is a million-dollar company. whatever the tax rate is, the highest tax rate for some succor of their making money, -- sucker out there making money, apply that to political campaigns, so they not only have to raise the money for the campaigns, but also the 39% tax.
i do not know what you would do with that money, maybe directly to deficit reduction, but i think it would be a nice incentive. host: we should note that while the house is coming in at noon and it could vote as early as 1:00 p.m. today, the senator did not get -- the senate did not go home after building this morning. harry reid said the senate will be coming in at 2:00 p.m. eastern time today. what is going on? guest: i do not know. i had not thought about that. usually, when these sneaky deals come together, usually you do not have worst trading in the house that would require it to come back to the senate. i would be surprised if that
happened, partly because however much speaker boehner might not like the bill, and his caucus might not like the bill, i think it is so painful and awful that they would rather just have votes on the things. if it failed, that would be interesting. i do not think it will. the size of the vote in the senate this morning, and the fact that republicans would not even go along with a much better deal for them, i just did not see how they come up with something alternative or any amendments. host: that have to go back to the senate. if that happens, turned to c- span2. rose, jamestown. independent. caller: i think we should follow
suit with for the as far as drug testing for the welfare people, and i worked for an aerospace company for 35 years, and they sent a lot of jobs to india, mexico and whenever, and if we started keeping those jobs here, at least some of those people would have worked -- have worked. also, the drug testing would get rid of a lot of people on welfare. guest: if you did take 535 people out of the phone book to solve these problems, an idea like the one rose just mentioned would overwhelmingly passed with 75%. it is an idea that will never
gain traction here because you have politicians that do not want to be perceived as rough on the poor, or anything like it, even though actually doing drug testing might help a lot of them, and help them seek help and get off of drugs, maybe. that might be a positive step in their lives, personally, but that will never happen because of the nature of politicians, especially in this town. they do not want to be perceived as, you know, people who want to be tough on the port. host: charles hurt, with "the washington times." thank you. guest: my pleasure. host: we will take a break, and continue to go outside of washington on new year's day,
2013, and get your take. we're back after this news update. >> some other news stories this morning. police in pakistan say five female teachers are dead after being ambushed. the women were working for a non-governmental organizations on the way to a community center. two health workers were killed. the attack happened in a province where many militants oppose female education. an update on secretary of state hillary clinton. doctors say she is making excellent progress at new york presbyterian hospital with a blood clot in her head. doctors say they are confident the blood thinners will dissolve blood clot and she will make a full recovery. new laws taking effect across the country today, and in
maryland, same-sex couples were greeted with cheers and noisemakers as gay marriage became legal in the first state south of the mason-dixon line. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> anxiety, dread, fear, what would happen january 1, 1863 when the emancipation proclamation was signed. many people spent three months those 100 days, begging the president, but do not do it, retract it. you still have time to step back. part of what i would like to do is tell you some of that story, the story that leads up to this moment as the nation waited for midnight, december 31. tonight, a look at the
emancipation proclamation with author louis masur followed by other historians. part of four days of american history tv at 9:30 p.m. eastern on c-span3. >> i primarily watch the house and the senate. i used to worked in the senate. c-span is where you could find something really important. i even listen to c-span radio c inar sometimes. -- in my car sometimes. >> c-span, cratered by america's cable companies in 1979, brought to you as a public service by your cable providers. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back to "washington journal."
you are waking up to a deal that was approved by the senate at 2:00 a.m. eastern time, 89-8. it now goes to the senate. david lippman -- lightman joins us. when could this vote take place? guest: it could take place anytime from 1:00 this afternoon until 1:00 a.m. thursday morning. there could be a lot of complaining by die-hard conservatives, but in the end, this thing will pass. the only thing is when will that happen? host: we are learning there is a 1:00 p.m. conference. what you expect happens there? guest: i think there will be a
lot of concern about the tax increases. in theory, since we have gone over the cliff, they are not increases anymore. they are just status quo. i think there will be concerned about that, and concern among rank-and-file about the fact that this agreement takes the can down the road another two months. it does not really resolve anything. the sequestration is delayed, but they also face the debt limit reached in about one month and a half, and march 27, federal spending authority runs out. in other words, they will be fighting this battle over and over, and that is a great concern to virtually everybody in congress. host: will republicans in the house, will they live to fight another day and approve this
deal? what do you think the vote will be? guest: that is tough. two weeks ago when speaker boehner had his plan b, the feeling was he had about 190 republican votes. there are roughly 241 votes in this congress. is that 190 holds, you will get an overwhelming vote with the assumption that most democrats are backing this. i could see this thing getting 300 votes come up but one thing we have learned is nothing is assured until the votes go on the board at host: you touched on this, -- board. host: you touched on this, there's work to be done for the what of the 13th congress. what is the dynamic there? guest: the democrats picked up a few seats in the senate, and it
becomes 55-45, and if john kerry is approved, it will be dropping to 54. in any event, but democrats have a little more strength, but we have a series of crisis beginning immediately. the president is inaugurated, january 21, and then we are back to fighting over the debt limit, the sequestration, the continued resolution. goes on and on. host: david lightman, give us the highlights of the deal approved by the senate early this morning. guest: the centerpiece is the bush era tax rates continue for everyone except for individuals earning over $400,000, and families earning over $450,000. in addition to that, several
other things -- the alternative minimum tax, amt, it is patched. medicare payments, there was a big cut in fees. not anymore. farm bills, there would have been an increase in those prices. that is been resolved. spending, two months, no sequestration, no automatic spending cuts until at least march 1. those are the highlights, but it shows you that there is a lot more to come. host: we will learn more details after the senate has voted and the house votes today. you were there at 2:00 a.m.. give us some color. guest: full disclosure, i was only there until about 11:00
p.m.. nobody liked this thing. nobody liked that it stretched out as long as it did, that it was a temporary patch. it was not a good mood. plus, it was new year's eve. outside of the capital, people were celebrating, and inside people were saying let's get this over with and get out of here. host: this is being called by " the new york times" the mcconnell-biden plan. what happens to mitch mcconnell? guest: those of us that follow congress know what a great deal maker mitch mcconnell is. he knows how to use power like few others do in the congress. during the debt crisis, it was his deal eventually was adopted
with some changes. he has a few less members, but he knows how to use the parliamentary system and he is a force to be reckoned with. you need to do business with mitch mcconnell, particularly since indeed 60 days to overcome procedural hurdles. host: same question, but this one for speaker john boehner in the 113th congress. guest: that is an interesting question to watch closely. house speakers do best when the rule with an iron fist. nancy pelosi muscled through health care, the economic stimulus and evil -- even the global warning plan. speaker boehner says let the rank-and-file worker there will. if there are signs that he is
going back to the nancy pelosi- style of leadership, when he had four members cost of various committees, that was a sign, you had better play ball or else. would he be able to sustain that? we will know in the next 48 hours. host: people will be watching, full coverage of the house, beginning at noon eastern time. david lightman thank you for your time. we appreciate you getting up early on this new year's. guest: thank you for having me. host: or coverage continues for another 15 minutes here, there we go to the floor at noon eastern time. the senate, if they need to, could come back at 2:00 p.m. eastern time. don, florida, but democratic
caller. you are up first, as the senate early this morning approved the deal on the so-called fiscal cliff. caller: happy new year. i think it is a good deal the democrats got, but i am worried on the second dell as they want to put social security on the line. it does nothing to do with the deficit. our taxes paid into social security. it has nothing to do with debt. i do not know why the republicans -- the republicans have been trying to get rid of social security for 70 years now and have not gotten it done. they want to take the money and give congress a raise. they want to take people's social security money and give congress a raise and what are
they doing? nothing. then they want to take money and give it to the pentagon. they put all of the money into these outfits, but they want to cut social security. host: john, ap reported this morning that officials decided to use the measure to prevent the pay raise for lawmakers. i want to let you know that, and also, if you are concerned about social security on the table in what is called round two after the 113th congress convenes, which happens this thursday, by the way, at noon. they will be sworn in. "washington journal" will be up there on capitol hill talking to new lawmakers. you are concerned about social security. what do you think about the president's role as a negotiator? the you trust him? caller: know.
i told the president -- i called the white house and told them. so security should have nothing to do with the tax bill. why should they put social security on it? that really bothers me. yet, they went and cut food stamps for little kids. host: robert on twitter says while the debt ceiling fight in a month or two make the fiscal cliff deal a new issue? mark, hi. caller: both republicans and democrats are lying to the american people about the nature of the fiscal cliff. they went over the fiscal cliff as a result of the wall street now down in 2008. senator sherrod brown in 2011 said the congressional budget
office reports it will cost tax payers 8.6 trillion to prop up the failed banking system, and neil barofsky, inspector general for the bailout program, has said regarding the nine biggest things, "hit did not matter if they were cooking the books. the larger holes would have been more reason for treasury to give the money." really, is about wall street fraud that drove the economy over the fiscal cliff, and the financial crisis inquiry commission concluded that the collapse in 2008 based on wall street fraud resulted in a london dollars trillion lost of household wealth and -- $11 trillion loss of household wealth and savings. obama says this was "legal." this is the problem. we have lawlessness on wall
street and washington, d.c. and they're committing crimes. we have massive fraud and cooking the books both on wall street and in washington that is not reported. host: denni says we can only hope that democrats do not get enough votes to do this deal. we are learning the democrats expect almost all of their members to vote in favor of the deal in the house. bobbie, college station, texas. go ahead. caller: i do believe we need to do drug testing for welfare, do some things with unemployment, motivate people to get jobs. so many people rely money coming in and they do not do anything about it. why would you go out and work if somebody is going to hand it to
you? we need to stop some of these hud for people. like the disabled, they need those things, but if you are physically able to work, you need to make an incentive -- if you want food stamps, unemployment, prove you are trying to work. host: body, -- ok, bobbie. chris, rhode island. caller: c-span blocks the callers that know the information. c-span has become a tool for fascism. the agenda is to block anyone who wants to speak on issues that matter, that are educated. they are a tool to -- for fascism. host: where you referring to specifically? caller: every time i've called
in for the past two years, you're screener screens out my call. in the past, i've said things that are intelligent when it comes to national debt, and senators that took bribes from the banks that have been voted to regulate the banking institutions from the banking subcommittee. also, about the election fraud in the country that is not being addressed, or the prosecution's that should be put against the senators for taking these bribes. host: well, you are on now, but off topic, and we do try to keep the phone calls coming in relevant to what we are talking about, and appropriate as well, so that is the role of the person answers the phone call, to talk to you and figure out what you want to say. "the washington times" reports the history of how we got to where we are this morning.
susan, corning, new york, republican. caller: how are you? my comment is this, looking at the green fiscal cliff, i'm a lower middle-class person, i do not qualified for food stamps, but we have a lower income and we survive. without a budget, our house would flounder. we know what is coming in, what is going out. this deal they came to in the middle of the night is not going to solve our government's problems. we have not had a government budget in over three years. if i did not do that in my house, i would be bankrupt, and
the government needs to take a serious look. if we do not have the budget, there will not be a cap on the spending, and if there is not a cap on the spending, they will go after the rich. if we take the money away from the higher-income families, that is what is really feeding the economy. if i have money, i will feed my kids, get something for the house, but the wealthy are the ones that are putting money into the economy if we -- and if we pluck that extra, how is that going to stimulate? no matter what income you have, every household has to have a budget. the government needs to look at people like us that take our budget seriously on a daily basis, and see where do we need to pull in our belts, and where can we cut our spending? host: you disagree with house
republicans voted in the senate last night? caller: i am on the fence. i think they did it as a desperation attempt because they do not want to see some of the taxes. i think it was a compromise, and maybe it was essential, but it will not solve the problem down the road. it might decrease the panic, but not solve the problem. host: bob to sit from "the hill" tweets this -- central instagram, to the house gop, but the bill better if you can, but pass it. the senator from south carolina said that he looks forward to round two of the negotiations and that he would not agree to raise the debt ceiling without cuts to medicare and social security. don, independent, tennessee.
caller: happy new year. can you verify these guys indeed voted themselves a raise yesterday index -- yesterday? host: what we are learning is in the deal approved by the senate, they use the measure to prevent a $900 million pay raise for lawmakers due to take effect this spring, so they can be canceled it out. -- canceled it out. caller: that is good news. the two times i was laid off from jobs, i was limited to 26 weeks of unemployment. is it possible that anyone in my position to have a class action suit against the administration, since we were
all 26 weeks, and the current crop is given 99? it does not seem like we were given our fair share host: ok. esther, new york. caller: one of my questions already answered. i am glad congress is not going to get a raise in this horrible recession we are in, and the woman before, hear, hear, to everything she was saying. use some common sense. we are all tired of this ridiculousness. i am a hairstylist from upstate new york, and i do not understand comings and goings of the financial climate, but like she said, use a budget. everybody should pay a fair amount of taxes, equal percentages, and nobody should be getting benefits to pay are not working for.
we need to stop supporting people in other countries at this point. i know we want to be helpful because we are a wonderful, kind country, but we do not have the money. use your common sense, and congress, there should be an amendment where they cannot get raises, and they should have to stick and abide by the same rules and laws that give us. host: will you be watching this afternoon? caller: 0, yes, i am. absolutely. host: do you think there should be a no vote? do you think democrats should vote no? caller: i'm not positive that the -- about everything they are voting for, but i say they should use their common sense. wastingful the we are our money, paying people to do this for us